Home / General / Daydream Believing About Jon Huntsman — Not Just For Matt Bai Anymore!

Daydream Believing About Jon Huntsman — Not Just For Matt Bai Anymore!


I can at least understand why Reuters went ahead with the farcical Soros conspiracy theories — money is money and a Drudge link is a Drudge link.   But what possible reason could there be at this late date to hire Gregg Easterbrook to write a political column?

Some greatest hits.

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Google+
  • Linkedin
  • Pinterest
  • You wrote “Lee” again.

    • Scott Lemieux

      Man, that was a boring graduation speech.

  • Craig

    I’m calling bullshit on the blog post you linked to.

    He’s ok at(sic) a football writer

    He is a fucking terrible football writer. So now I don’t know who to believe!

    (Okay, I know who to believe, and it’s anyone not named Greggggggg Easterbrook.)

  • Easterbrook is our authentic anti-Aristotle, the master of those who don’t know.

  • c u n d gulag

    What ever happened to the Poor Man Institute anyway?
    He stopped writing back in December of last year.
    Anyone know?

    And Easterbrook learned everything he doesn’t know from Bill Kristol.

  • Let me remind folks of this Easterbrook turd RE:Michael Vick being possibly innocent.

  • The comments on my post I linked above are priceless RE: Easterbrook:

    One of my faves:

    Brando: “It’s pretty clear that Easterbrook drafted Vick for his fantasy team.”

  • Davis

    He should stick to football. Not that he’s any good at it, but it’s less damaging than his science and political writing.

    • His team names were amusing, and he was right about coaches playing-to-not-get-blamed by refusing to go for it on fourth down when losing late in the game.

      • enemy of urkobold

        And yet he’ll liberally intermingle mind-numbing stupidity (cold-coach theory, cheerleader “professionalism”) with perfectly reasonable football ideas (don’t blitz eight, going for it on fourth-and-short works, try a toss play on the goal line instead of a dive)

  • joel hanes

    Easterbrook also writes about science, about which he demonstrably knows very little, and much of that wrong.

  • Quercus

    Yeah, on football he’s like some kind of living embodiment of the ‘Blind Pig’ syndrome, and how being right about something (e.g. too much punting) doesn’t make your arguments right (results-based thinking, cherry-picked examples, etc.). Since he’s wrong on football things as often as he’s right (e.g. saying blitzing is always bad), it makes reading him at least occasionally a good exercise in ‘spot-the-fallacy’ critical reading.

    And of course, whenever he writes about anything I do know something about, he’s wrong on the important parts. Which has made me worry whenever I find myself agreeing with something he says about football…

It is main inner container footer text